Berkshire Shareholder Letters 2011 (概說)

Link: http://www.berkshirehathaway.com/letters/letters.html

心得：

• (Page 4) Buy 63.9 million shares of IBM that cost us $10.9 billion。不懂。Total Liabilities 96,297 (Millions of USD)，Total Equity 20,138，這種資本結構怎麼買的下去咧？或許是穩定創造盈餘的能力受到巴菲特肯定。(請參考)
• I spent about $2 billion buying several bond issues of Energy Future Holdings. That was a mistake - a big mistake. 就如彭淮南所說，「增持黃金？假如金價跌下來怎麼辦？」天然氣就是黃金，假如天然氣價跌下來怎麼辦？我們應該考慮這種風險。舉例來說，鋼價上漲，是否意味買進中鋼？這可不一定。請記住這個例子。
• (Page 5) 房地產的判斷更是失準。請看 Shadow Government Statistics 的 No. 419: January CPI, PPI, Real Retail Sales and Housing Starts 報告。但房地產遲早會回來，循環就是我的信仰。
  
• (Page 6) Share Repurchases. Read Chapter Eight of Ben Graham’s The Intelligent Investor. 這章直接點出技術分析的毛病！

  First, the passage of time brings new conditions which the old formula no longer fits. Second, in stock-market affairs the popularity of a trading theory has itself an influence on the market’s behavior which detracts in the long run from its profit-making possibilities.

  市場變數越來越多，加上既成事實的心理作用，會使技術分析越來越失真。如果技術分析不可靠，或許該考慮基本分析及心理分析。
  
  接著 Ben Graham 探討 Buy-Low–Sell-High Approach。經驗直接告訴我：牛熊難分辨，事後才知道。想當初我以為已經跌的夠慘了，結果一慘還有一慘慘。但現在我可以參考預期投資報酬率、巴菲特指標，來推斷市場的狀態。投機本來就是藝術，若有定則可以分辨，那就不是投機。這麼在意市場狀態，對嗎？
  

  The development of the stock market in recent decades has made the typical investor more dependent on the course of price quotations and less free than formerly to consider himself merely a business owner.

  未看先猜結論：使用基本分析定出標的，被動等待便宜貨買進。說穿了就是利用人性脆弱的心理，低價買進好股票。高價買進好股票的下場通常很慘。例子：1300元的宏達電。低價買進爛股票也不好，這些爛股票 P/B 往往小於一。例子：P/B = 0.68 的彩晶。
  

  Ben Graham: As long as the earning power of his holdings remains satisfactory, he can give as little attention as he pleases to the vagaries of the stock market. At times he can use these vagaries to play the master game of buying low and selling high.

  然後呀，爛股票會變好股票，好股票也會變爛股票。總之股市就是戰爭，你得睜著眼睛睡覺。
  

  Most businesses change in character and quality over the years, sometimes for the better, perhaps more often for the worse. The investor need not watch his companies’ performance like a hawk; but he should give it a good, hard look from time to time.